Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Right first time Newbie - it was binary!
Hi Fenakit
You have correctly quoted the source but the source itself has some errors. The total known reserves of Lithium on Earth only amount to 17 million tonnes.
Nevertheless, the point you are making regarding increased demand is correct.
I can't see this happening. How much time do they need for the DD? CZN is hardly Shell. They could have done it in 4 hours. What is going on?
Mac despite my postings about the licence I think you are absolutely spot on here.
The price paid will depend on what is being bought. That depends on who has the licence to mine these untold riches. At the moment I think Aubrey's valuation may be correct. When the licence arrives it will move, and hopefully massively, in the direction of Rowka's. Where is that licence? I know people have had a go at me about mentioning this before but if it is such a formality where is it and why is the sp not substantially higher?
And I'm not trading.
Thanks mac. Sorry if I'm voicing unnecessary concerns. I want to recoup my money after SXX and this seems as good an opportunity as there will ever be. After 7 years there it just doesn't seem right that I could make back all my losses and more in what could be a few months here.
GFD, no I'm not trading. I think with a posting history of 40 in 5 years I've not really sought to influence much. And having bought in here at just about the highest price it has ever been I can only benefit if the price goes up. I really hope the licence is in the bag because clearly the sp will rise dramatically. I've read more about this share in the past couple of weeks than any other in the same time period. But the licence is clearly the elephant in the room or the sp would be much higher than it is.
In a previous post I asked 'What's in it for them?' in relation to SevZapNedra or whoever owns/controls the land referred to as 'The Flanks'. I have read estimates of the in situ value of palladium and the other resources in the ground potentially being as high as $375 billion. Obviously the amount EUA are actually licensed to mine at the moment is a fraction of that amount, and actually only a relatively small percentage of the known amount of resources.
Therefore the absolute key to the enhanced value of the company is that licence. Even if it were 'only' to add 2 billion to the value of the company (and some estimates are much higher than this) whichever company buys EUA is still effectively paying 2 billion for that licence which then effectively comes straight to us as shareholders. The area will still benefit from whatever taxes, jobs, onward licensing charges etc the new miner will generate but they will have given us an asset we may only possess for a week before selling it.
Therefore why should the licence not be sold to EUA, or to the next company directly? I did not intimate there would be any corruption and I would expect laws to be followed but licensing (or planning) issues are not always black and white and laws can change. If I was sitting in the SevZapNedra office with the stamp in my hand I would be saying 'hold on a minute, if I stamp this all those on the LSE chat board get to retire early and all we get to look forward to is a 20 year job at the mine. There must be something we can do about this.'
I don't think any offer price will even be hinted out by the company or any potential buyer until that stamped document is in the company's hands. I very much hope it is the formality which has been alluded to.
Thanks for your replies to my questions, especially GFD. It still seems a bit unreal that EUA could acquire a licence to mine, for very little cost, and them immediately sell it for essentially a billion quid.
In relation to having a banker on the board of an AIM company Sirius had one. Many of us wouldn't use the letter b in banker!
I'm an ex SXX shareholder and was in that share for 7 years. I took a very active interest in it over those 7 years and had a very good understanding of it. As many on here will know we were very unlucky and there is still an argument to say what happened to us was unlawful. I lost a lot of money.
But having been badly burned there I have been reticent to return to shares and so have arrived late here. I'm probably one of the few who at the current sell price around 17.5p would lose money again.
Despite having arrived late I have done some research and have read thousands of posts here, particularly those with research behind them, and also looked at research papers elsewhere.
But I still have a fundamental question relating to the flanks - if a licence is granted for the flanks it adds over a billion to the value of the company, maybe much more, which could be realised within weeks if the company is sold. If this is realised just as a consequence of the licence being granted what is in it for those granting the licence? In itself the licence is the added value.
Going back to SXX we were looking at dividends as high as 2 billion a year when fully operational and the life of the mine would have been over 100 years. The finance of the build was our stumbling block there and yet we were sold out for a pittance. hat is different here?
Additionally I've also read that the share price of EUA could be £6 to £8 if they developed the mine themselves (with flanks) and yet revenue for an already operating mine is currently only £1m. I've still not got my head around the apparent difference in scale.
With a share price currently 18p and figures of 60p to 78p for the sale (with a low of 30p and a high of £3.50) I'm also struggling to see why the price is only 18p if there is a minimum 50% upside within weeks and a long term £6.
If anyone is able to enhance my understanding I would be grateful.
And even this has to be snook out via the back door and not via an RNS. Just sums up the whole contempt the BOD has always had for us
Hi Fred
No. It's 50% of those who vote, so those who don't vote don't count.
Jacko
I've just read this about Steve Davies. I must say that when I first heard about Jupiter's protestations I also read about the poor performance of his fund and that made me think his call was out of desperation even though I also obviously think we are being robbed. If I thought that I'm sure AAL and JPM etc did likewise. It didn't give me confidence that his request would be needed and now he is gone.
I've had the same issue with Barclays and I do have it in writing so here it is:
"I am emailing you regarding your recent complaint, in which you advised us that you were hoping to lodge in one paper certificate of Sirius Minerals and that you were also unhappy that you had not received any notification or information regarding the Sirius Minerals AGM/EGM.
As mentioned to you over the phone by myself and my colleague, we would be unable to complete the lodgement of your certificate within the timescale that you have requested. A standard lodgement can take up to ten working days, therefore we would not be able to complete this request for you to meet your needs.
In respect to not receiving any notification regarding the AGM/EGM, this is not information that we notify our clients of. Our process is such that if there is a corporate action such as a voluntary event (i.e. tender offer, scheme of arrangement, etc.) we will contact our clients so that they can then act upon this accordingly. An AGM/EGM is information that is publicly available via the respective company’s website and as an execution only broker, we have no specific obligation to notify our clients of these events.
I appreciate that for you this has been a source of frustration but this is well within our process, so we have made no error. I would certainly be happy to take your feedback on board, however, and discuss with our business leaders whether or not we would consider notifying clients of these events in the future."
To be fair they have offered me a few bottles of wine so at £20,000 a bottle I hope I enjoy it.
Casa
Given that by this time tomorrow all those of us who are going to vote will have voted what would the process be now if on Friday for example AAL sweetened the deal? Would this vote be abandoned and the process started again?
John
I contacted Barclays Smart Investor today. They insist they need a 10 working day turnaround for the certificated share. I've made a complaint but it is too late.
In terms of giving them an instruction for the General Meeting they state the deadline is 5pm on Tuesday, which is an earlier date than I've read elsewhere.
The work Sharesoc are doing in trying to reform the treatment of investors with shares in nominee accounts is well worthwhile. Too late for me as I will lose a packet but I will not be happy if the vote is close.
I've also received no communication at all from Barclays. They state 'it is not a corporate action so we don't have to'. This is in contrast to HL who proactively contacted customers. So you are right - the organisations are not helping us in the least.
I emailed the Prime Minister using the official online form about support for Sirius and the plight of long term shareholders. This was on 13th January. I received an email back saying it was being transferred to the relevant department. I have just received the following response from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
Thank you for your email of 13 January, addressed to the Prime Minister about Sirius Minerals. As I hope you will appreciate, the Prime Minister receives significant volumes of correspondence on a daily basis, and, regrettably, is unable to respond to each one personally. Your email has been passed to this Department as we deal with this matter and I have been asked to respond.
All requests for Government financial support must meet necessary lending criteria and, when examining any request for financing, we have to assess the potential benefits of a project against the need to protect taxpayers’ money. However, I can assure you that the Government takes all proposals for financial support very seriously and assesses every aspect of each case in detail using a variety of information resources to ensure that the analysis is objective and robust.
Sirius Minerals announced on 8 January that it is in advanced talks with Anglo American regarding a takeover. The Government welcomes any commercial outcome that enhances the project’s viability.
Thank you again for taking the time to write.
Yours sincerely,
J Morrison BEIS CORRESPONDENCE UNIT
It is clear there is no meaningful work going on with Government for any support or loan guarantee to be given and the government is happy for Sirius to be taken over by AA even if shareholders are totally wiped out as long as the project continues.
I can't say I really expected any other reply, but this doesn't even come with a caveat of 'commercially sensitive discussions' which some government comments have included in the past.
Hi Aubrey
I agree. I was doing some mental maths last night and even if the whole thing was financed by dilution at 4p a share, absolutely massive number of shares, in 10 years time at 20mtpa I would still be getting about a 10% return on my current investment and my shares would be worth more than I paid for them. Small crumbs of comfort but from being 80% down at the moment it's something at least.
Aubrey. Totally agree about Yuen Low. Embarrassing. How is he even employed as an analyst? Pretty wild numbers in the past from him.
Spot on Aubrey. I nearly spilt my tea when I heard it wasJPM asking a question. Absolutely astonishing.